Congressional Record: May 13, 1999 (House)
Page H3112-H3141
INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
[...]
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Hinchey
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 4.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Hinchey:
SEC. 304. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
AGENCY IN CHILE.
(a) In General.--By not later than 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Director of Central
Intelligence shall
[[Page H3124]]
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report
describing all activities of officers, covert agents, and
employees of all elements in the intelligence community with
respect to the following events in the Republic of Chile:
(1) The assassination of President Salvador Allende in
September 1973.
(2) The accession of General Augusto Pinochet to the
Presidency of the Republic of Chile.
(3) Violations of human rights committed by officers or
agents of former President Pinochet.
(b) Documentation.--(1) The report submitted under
subsection (a) shall include copies of unedited documents in
the possession of any such element of the intelligence
community with respect to such events.
(2) Any provision of law prohibiting the dissemination of
classified information shall not apply to documents referred
to in paragraph (1).
(c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``appropriate
congressional committees'' means the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives, and the Select Committee on
Intelligence and the Committee on Appropriations of the
Senate.
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, because of recent activities by a certain
member of the Spanish judiciary, the attention of the world has once
again been directed at the events which took place in Chile beginning
in September of 1973 with the assassination of the duly-elected
president of that country, Salvador Allende, and the subsequent
ascension to power of General Augusto Pinochet to become the President
of the Republic of Chile.
In the course of those events, it has been alleged in responsible
venues over and over again in the intervening now more than 25 years
that very inappropriate actions were taken by members of the Chilean
military, assisted by others, including members of the military of the
United States.
I have an amendment which requires that no later than 120 days after
the date of the enactment of this act, the director of the Central
Intelligence Agency shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees which are mentioned in the amendment a report describing all
activities of officers, covert agents, and employees of all elements of
the intelligence community with respect to the following events in the
Republic of Chile:
One, the assassinations of President Salvador Allende in September of
1973;
Two, the ascension of General Augusto Pinochet to the presidency of
the Republic of Chile; and
Three, the violations of human rights committed by officers or agents
of former President Pinochet.
The report submitted under this subsection shall include copies of
unedited documents in the possession of any such element of the
intelligence community with respect to such events.
Mr. Chairman, I think that after the passage of all of this time, it
is appropriate that the United States Congress and the people of the
United States and the people of the world understand with much greater
clarity than they have been able to up to this moment the specific
events which took place in Chile which led to the assassination of the
duly-elected president and the ascension of power by a military junta.
It is important for us to understand these events because it is
important for us to take action to ensure that these kinds of illegal
activities do not occur in the future.
So therefore, I offer this amendment with all respect in the hopes
that the Members of the House and the chairman particularly, the
chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, will see
fit to look upon it favorably.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the intent of the amendment very much, but
I must say, I have some misgivings about the effect and the cost, and I
want to take a minute to explain that.
First, with regard to the purpose, let me say that our committee is
trying, I think through its mark on the budget and through its
oversight, to help our intelligence community focus on the challenges
we have got today and coming in the next century. They are incredible
challenges of a sort that we are really not organized to deal with, as
we are seeing, unfortunately.
We are in the process of getting that done, but we understand the
Warsaw Pact is gone, and in its place we have the Osama Bin Ladens, the
Milosevics, the Tijuana cartels, that type of problem.
This amendment would, I think, have us take a break from the reality
we are faced with today and go back and start sifting through some
history of things that happened at a different time, really under a
different agency that was operating under different rules and certainly
under different oversight.
That can be beneficial if it is going to yield us some lessons, but I
think we ought to understand that if we are going to do this, it is
going to take energy, effort, and dollars, and we want to make sure
where we are prioritizing those relative to the lessons from history
and whatever else we might glean from this effort.
I am a little confused with regard to the extensive ongoing effort by
the administration to respond to a request by the Spanish government
under its mutual legal assistance treaty with the U.S. for documents,
roughly in this same period. I presume these searches are related, but
I do not know whether there is any formal coordination and how this
amendment would fit into it.
Going to the cost factor, legislation directing special searches, as
I have said, is disruptive to the normal course of business, and the
normal course of business in the intelligence communities these days,
it is exceptionally challenging.
I would also point out that when we have these special searches, that
they sometimes delay requests of our own constituents under the Freedom
of Information Act. I do not say that to say that we should not have
special requests. I think we only need to point out that that sometimes
happens.
We have had considerable conversation with the head of the community,
the intelligence community, about how we go about dealing with the
classification and declassification process. That is ongoing. There is
very definite bona fide concern about how much dollars and time and
personnel we direct to that effort relative to other things that the
intelligence community is being asked to provide for today's
decisionmakers, to get us through the day. Of course, we have to figure
out, where does the money come from.
These are not new thoughts. I am only putting these on the record and
getting them out of there because I do not want the gentleman to think
that we are just knee-jerk reacting negatively. There are negative
consequences to this amendment, in part.
{time} 1230
The amendment would provide no new information to the public as far
as I know, the people who are interested in the abuses of the Pinochet
years. I think instead we are going to get lots of boxes going into a
closed committee review, and I am not sure where that is going to lead
us.
So I am concerned about, if the purpose is to get at the truth and
the history and where we are doing it, I would like to do that in a
reasonable way. I share the desire of the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Hinchey) to do that.
If the way we can do it passes muster with the community, and the
costs are reasonable, and the expectations are reasonable given the
personnel that we have, then I would possibly be in a position to
accept this amendment with those understandings.
So I ask to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) to accept a
second-degree amendment which would strike paragraph (2) of the section
304(b) in its entirety. If so, and the House agrees to the amendment
amending the gentleman's amendment in that way, I would accept his
amendment.
The reason I say that is the amendment I would propose would cure the
constitutional problem that I see in the provision which would have
overridden all the laws authorizing the DCI and the President to
protect sources of national security information from disclosure and
compromise. We just accepted an amendment from the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Sweeney) to strengthen that. So I do not want to now turn
right around and undercut it.
So with the offending provision omitted, any threat of the veto would
be removed, we would be consistent, and I think I could see my way to
supporting what the gentleman is trying to get done.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey)
for response on my proposal amendment.
[[Page H3125]]
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
As I understand it, the gentleman is offering an amendment to my
amendment which would strike paragraph (2) of section 304(b) as
proposed to be added by the amendment; is that correct?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) has
expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Goss was allowed to proceed for 1
additional minute.)
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) is
correct.
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Goss), the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
and I am happy to accept his amendment to my amendment.
Amendment Offered By Mr. Goss to Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Hinchey
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Goss to amendment No. 4 offered by
Mr. Hinchey:
Strike paragraph (2) of section 304(b), as proposed to be
added by the amendment.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, that is the amendment we have had the
discussion on. I have nothing further.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hinchey amendment and commend
the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of
our committee, for his accommodation of the Hinchey amendment.
But I want this amendment to survive the conference because I think
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) has provided some great
leadership to us today in presenting this amendment. That is why I am
very grateful to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) for his
amendment to accommodate the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
Our distinguished chairman laid out some important considerations in
his observation of this amendment, and they are important. There are
other equities to be balanced, and I am glad that my colleagues have
come to an agreement on the amendment. But, again, I want it to survive
the conference. I want to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Hinchey).
Our President was in Guatemala a few months ago, or was it weeks? So
much happens so fast around here. I was very proud of the statement
that he made. Latin America had been in turmoil for a couple of
generations, as we all know, some of it, sad to say, and in Guatemala
in particular, with the involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency
and other American entities there.
The President, I think very courageously, recognized what happened
there and, in doing so, I think began to open the door to a better
future for the intelligence community.
In Central America and in Latin America the expression ``nunca mas''
is so famous, because in Argentina, in Chile, and Central America,
people are revisiting their sad recent past. An important bridge to the
future has been truth commissions which have identified, not to find
revenge, but to seek some level of justice and some level of openness
and admission about what happened to clear a way for the future.
If we, the United States and specifically the Central Intelligence
Agency, had a role in the death of President Allende, just as if any
Chilean had a role in it, putting it behind us requires facing the
truth about it.
So I think that, as far as Chile is concerned, this is a very
important amendment, but I think it also will build credibility for us
if we are not in a state of denial about the CIA's involvement but of
acceptance of what the reality was. We will find out what that is as a
result of the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
I also, though, want to say that, unless we are forthcoming on our
role, it is very hard to see why Latin Americans will be forthcoming
about what their role is. I think that we can lead by example in this
way.
I also would like to take the occasion to thank the gentleman from
California (Mr. George Miller) for his leadership and activity in
trying to persuade our government in making the documents available for
the Pinochet case to the Spanish government. I hope that this will be a
message to repressive dictators everywhere that a day of reckoning
comes, and that they just cannot commit these atrocities and then say,
well, let us put it all behind us.
As I say again, this is not about revenge, it is about truth. It is
about justice. It is about opening the way for a better future and
building credibility for what we do.
I agree with the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss). We should
not jeopardize the safety of our sources and methods. I think that his
amendment is a constructive one. These people risk their lives just the
way our young people do in the military. We are proud of the military.
We are proud of the people who put themselves in harm's way to gather
intelligence for us.
So while we are not condoning any activities that were not legal, we
cannot proceed with reasonable intelligence gathering if those who are
called upon to do so are in jeopardy because of unintentional
identification.
This is especially true at a time when we want more women, we want
more minorities, we want more diversity, we want more language skills,
we want more cultural understanding into the Central Intelligence
Agency. We want them to have the same level of protection that others
have had in the past.
Building that diversity with an openness and an admission of what our
past has been I think will build more support for what we need to have,
which is the best possible intelligence to avoid conflict and to supply
whoever the President of the United States is with the information he
needs to lead.
With that, again I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey)
and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), our chairman, and the
gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon), our ranking member, for their
leadership on this issue.
Mr. DIXON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) is
absolutely correct. The minority has no problem with this amendment.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I want to applaud the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Hinchey) on his amendment. It is no great secret that over the years,
there have been many aspects of American foreign policy which have been
wrong. It is no secret that the United States over the years has been
involved in the overthrow of a number of democratic governments.
In the case of Chile in 1973, there was a democratic government
elected by the people. The President of that government was Salvador
Allende. His policies antagonized corporate interests in the United
States. A great deal of pressure was brought to bear in seeing him
overthrown.
I think it is a very positive step as we develop ideas for the
future, as we try to develop a democratic foreign policy that we in
fact know what we did in the past.
So I think the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey)
is a very important one. I think we should let the truth come out, and
I strongly support his efforts.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong
support of Mr. Hinchey's amendment to require a report to Congress on
information held by the United States pertaining to human rights
violations in Chile carried out by Gen. Augusto Pinochet and his
forces.
The 1973 military coup in Chile was a tragic interruption of Chile's
proud democratic history. Thousands of innocent people were killed.
Many more were tortured and imprisoned. American citizens are among the
dead.
The military coup in Chile also represents a tragic chapter in
American history.
It is now widely understood that the United States supported the
violent overthrow of a democratically elected government. But the full
details of U.S. support for the coup are still not known.
We need to know the full details.
In addition, the full details of U.S. information concerning the
actions of the coup's leader, Gen. Augusto Pinochet, are not fully
known.
It is widely understood that Gen. Pinochet directed the coup and the
mass killings and torture that occurred during his nearly two decade
long reign. But the American people
[[Page H3126]]
deserve to know and would be better off knowing the full details of
Gen. Pinochet's actions.
Only the United States at this point has the ability to fully inform
its citizens of this ruthless dictator's actions.
Along with my colleagues, I have been demanding that the United
States supply information about Gen. Pinochet's murderous actions to a
court in Spain that has brought charges against Gen. Pinochet for
violations of international law, including torture, murder and
kidnapping.
The United States is believed to house records that would corroborate
the charges against Gen. Pinochet.
Those records should be reviewed, declassified and turned over to the
court in Spain. Some information has been turned over and after much
delay the United States has established a task force to oversee this
request. It is a slow process and many believe that some in the
Administration would prefer that the information never see the light of
day.
Without objection, I would like to submit into the Record a series of
letters between myself, my colleague, John Conyers, and other members,
including Mr. Hinchey, and the Administration.
These letters explain the nature of the information we seek and the
importance of providing the information to the Spanish court.
The actions in the 1970s of the U.S. intelligence community and the
then Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, toward Chile and other
dictators in the southern cone are a disgrace that should never be
forgotten by American citizens who wish to think honorably about their
country and their government.
A journalist, Lucy Kosimar, recently uncovered a memo that describes
how Secretary of State Kissinger coddled Pinochet after the coup.
In a recent article, Kosimar wrote:
The memo describes how Secretary of State Kissinger stroked
and bolstered Pinochet, how--with hundreds of political
prisoners still being jailed and tortured--Kissinger told
Pinochet that the Ford Administration would not hold those
human rights violations against him. At a time when Pinochet
was the target of international censure for state-sponsored
torture, disappearances, and murders, Kissinger assured him
that he was a victim of communist propaganda and urged him
not to pay too much attention to American critics.
This is what Kissinger reportedly told Pinochet in a private meeting
in 1976, according to Lucy Kosimar:
In the United States, as you know,'' Kissinger told
Pinochet, ``we are sympathetic with what you are trying to do
here. I think that the previous government was headed toward
communism. We wish your government well.
A little while later, Kissinger added: ``My evaluation is
that you are a victim of all left wing groups around the
world, and that your greatest sin was that you overthrew a
government which was going Communist.
Kissinger decided that the international fight against communism
justified the rape and torture of Chilean women, justified their
mutilation. Justified their execution.
More than 20 years later new information about the U.S. role in the
coup and U.S. knowledge about human rights violations by Pinochet are
still coming to light. Clearly there is more information that is housed
in the intelligence communities' warehouses and that information should
be made public.
In 1976, an American citizen, Ronnie Moffitt, was blown up on the
streets of Washington with her Chilean colleague, Orlando Letelier.
Pinochet is widely suspected of having personally ordered their deaths.
This act of terrorism should never be forgotten, in the hopes that it
will never be repeated. Pinochet is living in London right now,
awaiting the fate of an extradition hearing for trial in Spain.
Whatever information the United States can provide on the deaths of
Ronnie Moffitt and Orlando Letelier in Washington should be made
available so the truth can be known once and for all and justice can be
rendered in this ugly, ugly chapter of American and Chilean history.
Congressional Letters to the Clinton Administration on the Case Against
Gen. Augusto Pinochet
(1) November 23, 1998 Letter from Rep. George Miller to
Attorney General Janet Reno.
(2) October 21, 1998 Letter from 36 Members of Congress to
President Clinton.
(3) March 17, 1998 Letter from Reps. George Miller and John
Conyers to President Clinton, and the President's June 3
response.
(4) April 15, 1997 Letter from Reps. Miller and Conyers to
Attorney General Reno and Mr. John Shattuck, Department of
State, and the Justice Department's May 23, 1997 response.
November 23, 1998.
Hon. Janet Reno,
U.S. Attorney General,
Department of Justice, Washington, DC.
Dear Attorney General: I am writing to follow up on our
telephone conversation on the afternoon of Friday, November
13 concerning the United States response to the arrest of
Gen. Augusto Pinochet. I sincerely appreciate your taking the
time to speak with me about this issue.
As you may recall, I raised three issues with you during
our conversation. First, I expressed my belief that the
United States still has not turned over to the judges in
Spain all materials in its possession that are relevant to
the cast against Gen. Pinochet. Second, I expressed my belief
that the United States should make available to Spain Michael
Townley for questioning, but that it had not yet done so. And
finally, I asked if you would grant a request for a meeting
that I understood was made by the widow and widower of the
Letelier-Moffitt assassinations, and their attorney.
With regard to the meeting request for Isabel Letelier,
Michael Moffitt and their attorney, Sam Buffone, you informed
me that you were seriously considering such a meeting. I
sincerely appreciate your efforts in that regard.
With regard to Michael Townley, you told me that you were
looking into the status of the request to make him available.
I wish to again urge that he be made available to the Spanish
judges for the purposes of questioning him about Gen.
Pinochet's association to criminal and terrorist activities.
As you probably know, Michael Townley was formerly in the
Witness Protection Program and his whereabouts are known to
the F.B.I. I would also urge you to make available Fernandez
Larios, a known terrorist who plead guilty to criminal
charges in the United States and can provide important
information about Gen. Pinochet. I would hope that the F.B.I.
and the Department of Justice have kept track of Mr. Larios
at least to the extent that he can be located for purposes of
serving a subpoena. It is my understanding that Judge Garzon
is prepared to come to the United States at any reasonable
time upon notice that Mr. Larios and/or Mr. Townley are
available.
And finally, with regard to the materials requested by
Spain, you asked me to provide you with information about any
materials that may not yet already have been provided to
the judges. I am providing to you in this letter details
of materials that I believe are of interest to Spain and
relevant to their investigation of Gen. Pinochet but that
have not yet been made available.
As you know, and as we discussed on the phone, the Spanish
judges conducting the Pinochet investigation have made
requests of the United States Government, through the Spanish
Ministry of Justice, for the production of testimony and
documents pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal
Matters Treaty between the Spanish and U.S. Governments. It
is my understanding that a new request has just been made.
While you and your staff are already familiar with the
treaty, I thought it would be important to raise a number of
points here to help clarify the responsibilities of the
United States in this area. There are several important
provisions in the MLAT that bear on the Spanish request for
cooperation. First, under Article I, Section 3, assistance is
to be provided without regard to whether the act giving rise
to the request for assistance is a crime in the requested
country. Accordingly, so long as the Spanish court has
confirmed its jurisdiction to investigate the claims against
Pinochet, it is irrelevant whether or not they would be valid
claims under U.S. law. The only requirement under the MLAT
for dual criminality is in cases of claims for forfeiture or
restitution. Under Article IV, a request for documents
requires only a generalized description of what is sought for
production. Under Section 3 of Article IV, additional
specificity should be provided to the extent necessary and
where possible. These provisions require specificity
regarding individuals to be questioned, but do not contain
any additional requirement of specification as to the
description of evidence or documents. Article V, Section 6,
requires that the requested country respond to reasonable
inquiries concerning the progress towards full compliance
with the request.
Confidentiality is governed in part by Article VII which
would permit the U.S. to require that any information or
evidence furnished under the Treaty be kept confidential or
used only under specific terms and conditions by the Spanish
court. Classification is further covered by Article IX which
provides for the production of records of government
agencies. Under Subsection 1, all publicly available
documents must be provided. Subsection 2 permits the
requested state to provide copies of any documents in its
possession which are not publicly available to the same
extent and under the same condition as copies would be made
available in Spain to judicial authorities or in the United
States ``to its own law enforcement and judicial
authorities.'' The requested state is, however, permitted to
deny a request pursuant to these provisions entirely or in
part. Accordingly, while the Treaty does not deal directly
with classified information, the U.S. is granted broad
discretion to produce or withhold classification and should
do so to the same extent that it would provide such
information to domestic law enforcement or judicial
authorities. Article XII requires that the U.S. use its best
efforts to ascertain the location or identity of persons or
items specified in a request.
As I said on the phone, there are serious questions raised
as to whether the U.S. has complied with both the spirit and
letter of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty. Despite
[[Page H3127]]
the long pendency of several letters of request, it is my
understanding that the U.S. has not discharged its
obligations under Article XII to use its best efforts to
ascertain the location of either persons or documents. The
U.S. has failed to produce key individuals for testimony and
has not conducted a complete search of documents in the
possession of government agencies, including the Central
Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense, and the FBI.
Further, it is my understanding the U.S. has refused to
produce classified documents when the letter and spirit of
Article IX should permit, if not require, production to the
same extent that documents were provided to the U.S.
Attorneys Office during the initial Letelier-Moffitt
investigation.
The Justice Department, as the convening authority, should
also reassess the extent and vigor of its effort to locate
and produce documents. There are certain classes of
identifiable records that should be searched for and if
available, immediately produced:
1. Defense Intelligence Agency Reports, such as
``Directorate of National Intelligence (DINA) Expands
Operations and Facilities,'' April 15, 1975 along with
referenced ``IRs'' and all other cables and reports from the
U.S. Defense Attache's office in Santiago during the mid-
1970's that relate to the Chilean Secret police, the chain of
command, human rights abuses, and international terrorism.
2. Defense Intelligence Agency Biographic Data, the yearly
commentary and career summaries on military commanders done
by the DIA--in this case on General Pinochet and Col. Gen.
Manual Contreras between 1974-78.
3. State and NSC Documents identified in ``Disarray in
Chile Policy,'' July 1, 1975. This document states that ``a
number of officers in the Embassy at Santiago have written a
dissent'' cable arguing that all U.S. assistance to Chile be
cut off ``until the human rights situation improved.'' This
cable was discussed at a ``pre-IG (Interagency Group)
meeting--presumably in June 1975. It was supported by the
Policy Planning Office of the Bureau of Inter-American
Affairs.
A specific paper trail can be ascertained, including but
not limited to:
a. the ``Dissent'' cable from the U.S. Embassy officers;
b. minutes/notes/briefing papers for/of the ``pre-IG
meeting;''
c. all position papers relating to this discussion prepared
by the Policy Planning Office at the Bureau of Inter-American
Affairs.
4. Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of
State, reports, summaries, and briefing papers on the Chilean
military, DINA, and human rights violations, 1973-80.
5. The Chile Files of the Office of the Assistant Secretary
of State for Human Rights, Patricia Derian, 1977-80. These
files, kept by Ms. Derian's Deputy Marc Schneider, likely
contain a wealth of information on Chile's human rights
atrocities, and also on the Letelier case and the issue of
U.S. extradition of Chilean officials, and sanctions against
Pinochet's government for lack of cooperation in the case.
In addition to the above records and document groups
identified by the Spanish court, U.S. cooperation under MLAT
should include reviews of other relevant files. These
include:
1. A critical document on General Pinochet's role in the
Letelier bombing, read by Justice Department prosecutor
Eugene Propper during the federal investigation into the
crime.
2. CIA Reports between 1973 and 1979 by the Agency's Office
of African and Latin American Affairs (A/LA) on Chile's
military, chain of command, DINA, Operation Condor, General
Pinochet and human rights violations, assassination of
General Carlos Prats in September 1975, and Orlando Letelier
in September 1976.
3. CIA Directorate of Operations cables and reports on
Operation Condor--including Chile's attempt to establish an
Operation Condor office in Miami in 1974; the assassination
of Carlos Prats, and Orlando Letelier, and other human rights
abuses.
4. A review by the Gerald Ford Presidential Library staff
(Karen Holzhausen) of the still classified Kissinger-
Scowcroft files relating to Chile, terrorism and human rights
violations.
5. A review by the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library staff
for the still classified Bzrezinski files on Chile, human
rights violations, and sanctions against Chile for the
Letelier assassination; and the files of National Security
Council advisor on Latin America, Robert Pastor, for similar
documentation.
6. A search by the CIA-FBI Center for Counter terrorism for
files, including those of the predecessor to that agency, on
Chilean involvement in international terrorism.
7. A re-review of heavily censored NSC and State Department
documents released during legal discovery in the Letelier-
Moffitt civil suit.
A thorough review and collection of relevant U.S. documents
is critical to the Spanish judges' investigation. But I hope
you would agree that it is also critical for the United
States to gather this material to help our own government
decide whether it too should take legal action against Gen.
Pincochet.
As I expressed to you on the phone, I have a long history
of involvement with Chile, beginning with my participation in
a congressional investigation in Chile in 1976, prior to the
assassination of Orlando Letelier and Ronnie Moffitt. In
fact, Mr. Letelier had helped to facilitate the congressional
trip to Chile. Chile has a long and proud history of
democracy. Gen. Pinochet's military coup was an aberration in
Chile's history. His rule was marked by extreme violence,
total disregard for human and civil rights, and by
international act of terrorism, including the assassination
on U.S. soil of an American citizen and a Chilean exile.
Given this Administration's stated commitment to promoting
human rights and democracy and to curbing global terrorism, I
consider the legal fate of Gen. Pincochet to be a matter of
utmost concern for the United States Government.
Again, I sincerely appreciate your time and attention to
this matter and I will appreciate being appraised of the
status of these requests.
Sincerely,
George Miller, M.C.
____
October 21, 1998.
Hon. William Jefferson Clinton,
President,
The White House, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: The October 17 arrest of General
Augusto Pinochet in London is a good example of how the goals
you outlined in your anti-terrorism speech at the United
Nations can be put into practice. Indeed, when the rule of
law is applied to combat international lawlessness,
humanity's agenda gains.
We are writing to urge you to reinforce your eloquent words
at the recent United Nations General Assembly session by
joining with the British government in fully cooperating with
the precedent-setting case against Chilean General Augusto
Pinochet in Spain. Specifically, we call upon you to ensure
that the U.S. government provides Spanish Judge Baltasar
Garzon material related to Pinochet's role in international
terrorism--material and testimony that the U.S. government
has thus far withheld.
You will recall that on June 3, in response to a
congressional request, you wrote to assure us that the United
States would ``continue to respond as fully as we can to the
request for assistance from the Government of Spain'' for
information on the case against General Pinochet and other
Chilean military officials accused of international terrorism
and crimes against humanity.
It is our understanding that the United States has
materials and other critical information that will help link
Pinochet directly to acts of international terrorism. These
materials and information were obtained during the U.S.
investigation of the assassination of Orlando Letelier, a
Chilean exile, and Ronni Karpen Moffitt, his American
colleague. They were brutally murdered in Washington, D.C.,
in 1976 when a bomb exploded under their car while driving
around Sheridan Circle on their way to work. The
assassination was determined to be the work of the Chilean
secret police. It was also alleged, but unproven at the time,
that Pinochet was directly involved in the killings.
Unfortunately, we have been informed that the U.S. Justice
Department has given only public documents to the Spanish
judge, and has not ordered any classified material to be
delivered. In addition, the Assistant United States Attorney
assigned to obtain testimony from key witnesses in the case
against Pinochet and other former military leaders has not
elicited key testimony from people convicted in the Letelier-
Moffitt killings.
We have also learned that the Spanish judge is planning to
submit an expanded Rogatory Commission requesting in detail
the documents and witness testimony the U.S. government
should provide.
We urge you to direct the Justice Department and other
relevant agencies to act with haste in delivering the
appropriate solicited material. Your involvement now will
send a clear signal that you plan to take all steps necessary
to stop international terrorism and bring to justice those
responsible for heinous crimes against humanity, including
the killing of an American citizen on American soil.
We note that the Spanish judge's petitions are based on the
European Convention on Terrorism that requires signatories to
cooperate with each other's judicial processes in cases of
terrorism. Certainly, the United States has a stake in
becoming part of this process. In addition, the Justice
Department previously determined that Spain properly
requested documents from the United States based on the
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, signed by Spain and the
United States.
We appreciate your commitment to stop international
terrorism. We strongly believe, however, that without
concrete actions to back up your commitment, international
terrorism will continue unabated. The case against Pinochet
and his allies presents a significant opportunity to work
with the world community to punish those responsible for
international crimes in Chile, the United States, and
elsewhere. We strongly urge you to support Britain and Spain
by releasing critical information to the Spanish judge as
quickly as possible. We understand that some of the materials
in question are of a classified nature. We believe steps can
be taken to comply with Spain's request without compromising
U.S. security interests and that these steps must be taken
immediately. The world is watching closely as you consider
this request. Absent our firm response, terrorists will
continue to believe they can act with impunity.
Sincerely,
George Miller; John Conyers; Nancy Pelosi; John Olver;
Maurice D. Hinchey; Alcee L. Hastings; Cynthia A.
[[Page H3128]]
McKinney; Howard L. Berman; Bob Filner; Anna G. Eshoo;
Henry A. Waxman; Jim McDermott; George E. Brown, Jr.;
Neil Abercrombie; Barbara Lee; Sam Gejdenson; Bernard
Sanders; Lane Evans; John F. Tierney; Martin Olav Sabo;
Rosa L. DeLauro; Lynn C. Woolsey; Carolyn B. Maloney;
Barney Frank; Lloyd Doggett; Frank Pallone; Charles B.
Rangel; David E. Bonior; Nita M. Lowey; Danny K. Davis;
James P. McGovern; Pete Stark; Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.;
Lucille Roybal-Allard; Marcy Kaptur; Elijah E.
Cummings.
____
March 17, 1998, (revised March 19, 1998).
Hon. William Jefferson, Clinton,
President of the United States,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President, Late last year, Justice Department
officials assured us that they would cooperate with a Spanish
judge investigating charges against General Augusto Pinochet,
former President and Commander in Chief of Chile, for
terrorism, genocide and crimes against humanity. Despite the
assurances of cooperation under the MLTA, it is our
understanding that the Justice Department effectively
stonewalled the judge when he visited the United States in
January, seeking to interview witnesses and retrieve
documents pursuant to his investigation.
Instead of producing the witnesses and documents, as called
for under the MLTA, and despite the desire of the former
prosecutors (Eugene Propper and Larry Barcella) to
communicate substantive information which they had but which
was still classified, we have been informed that the
Administration prevented Propper and Barcella from reviewing
their notes and file material before testifying, did not try
to make confessed murders Michael Townley and Fernando Larios
available, and handed over virtually no documents. Their
reasoning, according to people who had talked to officials at
the State Department and National Security Council, was that
they were processing materials which were difficult to find
and were not likely to lead to useable evidence. They would
formally comply but only when the component agencies
processed the materials. In private, we are told, they note
that by not turning over the documents promptly and
ultimately by not offering much that is useful ``the U.S. had
nothing to lose.''
They assess the possible damage to your impending visit to
Chile next month from not cooperating to be very low.
Apparently, U.S. Embassy sources believes that the anti-
Pinochet opposition does not have enough strength to mount
effective demonstrations to interfere with your visit. They
also assume that the Chilean press will not ask you tough
questions about the U.S. refusal to hand over documents and
produce witnesses. Apparently at the Justice Department and
the State Department, the belief is that the United States
can ``get away with'' not cooperating and receive minimum
public relations damage.
The motives for not cooperating with the Spanish judge
included fears that an indictment of Pinochet could put the
Chilean government in a precarious position on--and we find
this particularly difficult to believe at this time--that the
Chilean military might initiate a military coup.
We also find incomprehensible U.S. non-cooperation in a
case that involves international terrorism, specifically the
most horrendous act of extraterritorial violence Washington,
D.C. has witnessed in the last fifty years--the car-bombing
of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Karpen Moffitt on September 21,
1976. As you know, the U.S. government indicted the head of
Chile's Intelligence and Secret Police agency, who recently
asserted in Chile what U.S. officials always believed:
Pinochet gave the order to kill Letelier in Washington.
It seems to us that the Administration will force Members
of Congress to consider changing the terms of the NAFTA
debate. The assumption for admitting Chile to NAFTA
membership is that she is a functioning democracy. By
allowing the Chileans to put Pinochet beyond the reach of any
investigation, even U.S. compliance with a Spanish request,
the Administration is jeopardizing the integrity of other
treaty obligations under the anti-terrorism treaties. The
Administration and Congress should be alarmed at the
willingness of the Chilean government to ignore the growing
evidence about Pinochet's involvement in the Letelier
assassination.
We will propose to our colleagues that before we debate the
merits of the new NAFTA and fast track agreements vis a vis
Chile, we should air the U.S. government's passivity when it
comes to investigating terrorism on our own soil and crimes
against humanity elsewhere.
The U.S. should either work actively to deliver the most
complete set of declassified documents and witnesses to
Spanish judge Garcia Castellon, or face a more profound
debate on NAFTA, one that goes to the democratic nature of
our partners and the critical responsibilities that must
accompany any trade agreement.
We respectfully request that you look seriously and
expeditiously into this troubling matter.
Sincerely,
George Miller, M.C.
John Conyers, M.C.
____
The White House,
Washington, DC, June 3, 1998.
Dear George: Thank you for your letter regarding our
cooperation with a Spanish judge investigating allegations
that General Augusto Pinochet and other former Chilean
officials are responsible for human rights abuses against
Spanish citizens as well as others.
As you know, the Spanish judge's request was made under a
mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) we have with Spain. The
Department of Justice coordinates the execution of such
requests with the appropriate U.S. Government agencies.
Contrary to the information you may have received, the
Spanish authorities have indicated to the Justice Department
that they are very pleased with the extent of our cooperation
in responding to their request. The Department has
facilitated for Spanish authorities the depositions of
several individuals in the United States and has itself
deposed several other witnesses in whom the Spanish indicated
interest. While certain limits were placed on the testimony
that could be offered by two of these witnesses, this was due
to the fact that some of the information known by these
witnesses remains classified.
In addition, the Justice Department has requested that the
relevant agencies conduct a search for documents responding
to the Spanish court's request. It has already transmitted
four boxes of materials relating to the prosecutions of those
responsible for the bombing of Orlando Letelier and Ronni
Moffitt as well as numerous additional documents from the
Department of State. Other agencies are continuing to conduct
their searches for relevant documents and will respond in the
near future.
Our cooperation on this case is consistent with the
extensive efforts the United States Government has undertaken
to bring to justice those responsible for the Letelier-
Moffitt murders. As you know, the United States Government
has successfully prosecuted several individuals responsible
for these killings and indicted several others. Two of these
individuals are now serving time in a Chilean prison for this
crime. I believe that the efforts the United States
Government has taken on this case show our resolve to deal
quickly and decisively with acts of terrorism on our soil.
Finally, I want to assure you that we will continue to
respond as fully as we can to the request for assistance from
the Government of Spain.
Thank you again for writing to me about this important
matter.
Sincerely,
Bill Clinton.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hinchey
amendment.
General Augusto Pinochet rose to power in a bloody coup d'etat in
1973 that overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador
Allende. This ushered in seventeen years of military dictatorship
accompanied by the death of thousands of activists, journalists and
ordinary citizens.
According to the Church Committee Report of December 1975, ``The CIA
attempted, directly, to foment a military coup in Chile.'' Before
Allende was inaugurated, it passed weapons to coup plotters. When that
failed, it undertook a massive effort to undermine the government.
Senator Church found that ``Eight million dollars was spent in the
three years between the 1970 election and the military coup in 1973.
Money was furnished to media organizations, to opposition political
parties and, in limited amounts, to private sector organizations.''
Much of this is history in the sense that the repression in Chile has
stopped, and that country has made a remarkable transition to democracy
over the last decade. However, many are still forced to live with the
pain of General Pinochet's legacy and there is still far too much
information still being withheld from the public record about the
American role in Chile during those dark years.
The arrest of Pinochet in England last year was a tremendous step
forward for international law, reconciliation and human rights. Much of
the power to keep justice moving forward lies in the hands of the CIA,
the Department of Justice and other agencies of the U.S. government who
have been asked by the Spanish Judge prosecuting Pinochet, Garcia
Castellon, to provide information about Pinochet's reign of terror.
Even before the arrest of Pinochet, the Department of Justice assured
Congressman George Miller and I that they were cooperating fully with
Judge Castellon's inquiry. I am inserting into the Record an article
from the New York Times of June 27, 1997 which makes this point clear.
I am neither satisfied with the Department of Justice's response thus
far nor with the CIA's outright refusal to cooperate with the inquiry.
This is simply inconsistent with the American commitment to the
promotion of human rights.
This is especially remarkable since along with the Chileans and
Europeans who were murdered by Pinochet's hand were several Americans.
Ronni Moffit, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, and the
former Chilean ambassador, Orlando Letelier were killed in one of the
worst domestic terrorism incidents ever in Washington, DC. The attack
was carried out by DINA, the Chilean intelligence agency whose director
has stated that
[[Page H3129]]
Pinochet personally ordered the bombing. Even Elliot Abrams, Ronald
Reagan's Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs, has
suggested in the conservative journal Commentary that if Pinochet is
responsible for the Letelier-Moffit bombing he should be extradited to
the United States for trial. Section 304, Paragraph (a)(3) of the
Hinchey Amendment and will help shed much needed light on who is
responsible for this and other brutal murders.
The American people will never know the truth unless their government
expresses greater enthusiasm for prosecuting the Pinochet case both in
London and in Washington. The Hinchey Amendment is a critical step in
that direction and I urge my colleagues to support it.
[From the New York Times, June 27, 1999]
U.S. Will Give Spanish Judge Documents for Pinochet Inquiry
Madrid, June 26.--The United States has agreed to provide
Government documents to a Spanish judge investigating
terrorism and human-rights violations in Chile during the
right-wing dictatorship of Gen. Augusto Pinochet from 1973 to
1990.
It is the first investigation of crimes against humanity in
the death or disappearance of people during the Pinochet era.
The judge, who functions as a prosecutor under Spanish law,
is seeking evidence of genocide against Spanish citizens and
descendants of Spaniards.
But the case is even broader, and could delve into abuses
against at least 3,000 people of various nationalities,
including Charles Horman, an American whose disappearance in
Chile was depicted in the film ``Missing,'' said Juan E.
Garces, a Madrid lawyer representing relatives of the
victims.
The Madrid judge, Manuel Garcia Castellon, began the
criminal investigation last year, and in February requested
all pertinent documents from United States Government
agencies. Washington will cooperate ``to the extent permitted
by law,'' said a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General
Andrew Fois on May 23.
The letter, addressed to Representative John Conyers,
Democrat of Michigan, was also sent to the national security
adviser, Sandy Berger, the State Department and ranking
members of the House International Relations Committee.
Spain stands a good chance of getting useful American
documents about General Pinochet's Government because the
request came under a 1990 legal assistance treaty that allows
a wider sweep in searching for information, said Richard J.
Wilson, a law professor at American University in Washington.
The Judge has not yet charged anyone, but might seek the
extradition to Spain of General Pinochet, who is still
commander of the Chilean Army, Mr. Garces said.
Mr. Garces was an assistant to President Salvador Allende
Gossens of Chile, a Socialist, who died in September 1973
when General Pinochet led a coup that overthrew the elected
Marxist Government.
In a separate action, another Madrid judge is investigating
human rights abuses against 320 Spaniards under military rule
in Argentina from 1976 to 1983. The judge, Baltasar Garzon,
has also requested United States Government documents for his
inquiry.
The Chilean Government last month termed Spain's
investigation a ``political trial'' of Chile's transition to
democracy that began with elections in 1990. On Wednesday, it
said the American cooperation with the Spanish judge was
``positive'' but ``would not lead anywhere.''
The Madrid court and the American Embassy said today that
they had not received official confirmation of Washington's
agreement to provide documents.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) to the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), as amended.
The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.